Case Digest (G.R. No. 191622)
Facts:
In G.R. No. 212687, decided on July 20, 2022, the petitioners were Cesar V. Purisima, in his capacity as Secretary of Finance, Kim S. Jacinto-Henares, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and the Revenue Regional Director, BIR Region No. 12, Bacolod City. They sought to nullify several orders and a writ of preliminary injunction issued by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 60, Cadiz City, under Executive Judge Renato D. Muaez, in Special Civil Action No. 88-C, titled “In the Matter of Declaratory Relief on the Validity of BIR Revenue Regulations No. 13-2013 Amending Section 2(b) of RR 13-2008 Relative to the Definition of Raw Sugar for Value-Added Tax Purposes.” The respondents were five sugar industry associations and Antonio G. Tamon. On September 20, 2013, RR 13-2013 redefined “raw sugar” to include only muscovado sugar, thereby subjecting other raw sugar to VAT. On October 3 and 7, 2013, the RTC issued a temporary restraining order and later extended it, and on October 22 aCase Digest (G.R. No. 191622)
Facts:
- Regulatory Background
- On September 19, 2008, BIR issued RR 13-2008 defining “raw sugar” as sugar with sucrose content
- On September 20, 2013, DOF, upon CIR recommendation, issued RR 13-2013 redefining raw sugar as only muscovado, thereby subjecting centrifugal sugars to VAT.
- Trial Court Proceedings (SCA No. 88-C, RTC Branch 60, Cadiz City)
- October 3, 2013: Sugar producers associations filed for declaratory relief and sought TRO/preliminary injunction against RR 13-2013.
- October 3–23, 2013: RTC granted a 17-day TRO, approved a ₱1,000,000 surety bond, and issued a writ of preliminary injunction preserving the status quo ante.
- January 14, 2014: RTC denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration of the injunction.
- Supreme Court Petition and Supervening Event
- Petitioners filed a Rule 65 certiorari petition challenging the RTC’s injunction as violating Sec. 218 (no injunction rule) of the NIRC.
- May 22, 2015: DOF issued RR 8-2015, amending RR 13-2008 to restore the VAT exemption of raw cane sugar (including muscovado).
- May 14, 2021: Petitioners confirmed RR 8-2015’s effect, arguing the core issue remains the no injunction rule.
Issues:
- Whether the petition is moot and academic due to the issuance of RR 8-2015 restoring the VAT-exempt status of raw sugar.
- Whether the RTC’s issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction against the implementation of RR 13-2013 violated the “no injunction rule” under Section 218 of the NIRC.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)